OASIS Virtual I/O Device (VIRTIO) TC

 View Only
Expand all | Collapse all

[PATCH 00/17] admin: reconfirming the TC charter

  • 1.  [PATCH 00/17] admin: reconfirming the TC charter

    Posted 02-03-2021 22:46
    As previously reported https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/virtio/202101/msg00000.html the latest revisions to the TC Process and the OASIS Committee Operations Process include new requirements to periodically confirm the TC charter and appoint or reappoint the TC chair(s). Our current charter can be found here: https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/virtio/charter.php Also included as patch 1 in the series. Some of it is a bit out of date. E.g. it talks of 1.0 in a future tense. There is nothing major though. I therefore propose the following clarifications to the charter. I did my best to address previous comments by Cornelia. Please review, we need to finish the process by March. My idea is to eventually continue the TC through a charter clarification (Section 1.8). Michael S. Tsirkin (17): import the current TC charter charter: update historical notes charter: 1.0 is history charter: mention 1.x series in the background section charter: add channel I/O to list charter: drop attempts to list all devices charter: reserved id/feature list has nothing to do with 2.0 charter: explain what legacy is in the background section charter: update on deliverables charter: add motivation for changes made since 1.0 charter: update to mention 1.X instead of 0.9, 2.0 charter: document our focus on compatibility charter: TC as registrar for device IDs/features chater: document what we care about in changes charter: terminology charter: terminology charter: terminology charter.html 149 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 149 insertions(+) create mode 100644 charter.html -- MST


  • 2.  [PATCH 01/17] import the current TC charter

    Posted 02-03-2021 22:46
    Import the TC charter from: https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/virtio/charter.php Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> --- charter.html 133 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 133 insertions(+) create mode 100644 charter.html diff --git a/charter.html b/charter.html new file mode 100644 index 0000000..7006009 --- /dev/null +++ b/charter.html @@ -0,0 +1,133 @@ +<html> +<title>OASIS Virtual I/O Device (VIRTIO) Technical Committee TC charter</title> +<body> + <ol id="charter-outline" class="bold-lower-alpha"> + <li> + TC Name + <p>OASIS Virtual I/O Device (VIRTIO) Technical Committee</p> + </li> + <li>Statement of Purpose + <p> + Background: + </p> + <p> + Hardware virtualization allows multiple operating systems ("guests") to share the same hardware ("host") managed by host software ("hypervisor"). + </p> + <p> + These guests need networks, storage, consoles and similar but non-virtualization-aware standard devices cannot be shared, or guests may not be permitted to access host devices at all. The simplest solution is to emulate a device expected by the guest operating system, but this can be slow and/or complicated. As most operating systems have facilities for adding drivers for new physical hardware, we can use the same facilities to add drivers for devices which are easier and/or more efficient to implement in software. + </p> + <p> + As every hypervisor is different, they tend to implement hypervisor-specific devices, requiring every guest to support a new device for that environment. For example, Linux currently supports completely separate drivers for eight different virtualization platforms, with most drivers being sub-optimal. In 2007, an attempt was made to implement a hypervisor and OS-agnostic device model in Linux guests and the KVM hypervisor over the standard PCI bys. This is now also supported by the VirtualBox hypervisor (2010) and FreeBSD guests (2011). + </p> + <p> + A Draft Specification + </p> + <p> + In 2009, as interest accumulated, the "Virtio PCI Card Specification" was published, with appendices for network, block storage and console devices. The emphasis was that virtual devices should be simple, look like driver authors expect physical devices to look, should be extensible, and that they should perform well. + </p> + <p> + Even at the time, there were implementations of virtio devices over non-PCI transports, and in 2011 the simplified "mmio" transport was added as an Appendix, as well as a "remote processor message" device which is actually used to communicate to a separate, physical CPU, rather than a virtual guest. + </p> + <p> + The years of experience have highlighted some of the implementation and design mistakes: enhancements have worked around many of them, but at cost of simplicity. Implementation bugs have also caused occasional anguish. + </p> + <p> + A 1.0 Specification + </p> + <p> + Our goal is to keep the good, discard the bad, and make the ugly optional. In particular, we will try not to break too much, and ensure it's possible for devices to support both 1.0 compliant and legacy guest drivers. + </p> + </li> + <li> + Scope + <p> + The "Virtio PCI Card Specification" 0.9.5, minus the Appendix H, shall be used as a starting point (referred to as "legacy"). Note that we expect the final output of this TC to be incompatible with that specification, though it will be possible for virtual devices to support both legacy and modern guest drivers. + </p> + <p> + The TC will produce an OASIS Standard by refining and documenting existing implementations and practice. After publication of the initial OASIS Standard, the TC may choose to develop a Version 2.0 standard that builds on lessons learned and identified trends and that may result in a significantly different architecture and approach. Until then, the TC shall not throw out the baby with the bathwater, boil the ocean, or embark on a PhD research topic. + </p> + <p> + The TC will consider one or more buses for virtual devices, including PCI. It will consider various kinds of devices, including network devices. Each part of the OASIS Standard will be considered in terms of portability, simplicity, least-surprise for driver authors, extensibility and performance. In particular, the effect of future radical extensions (such as layout changes) will be considered. + </p> + </li> + <li> + Deliverables + <ol class="spaced decimal"> + <li> + Specification of feature negotiation, configuration and queues, from both driver and device points of view. + <ol class="vanilla-lower-alpha"> + <li> + Specifically for virtio over PCI. + </li> + <li> + Specifically for virtio over mmio. + </li> + <li> + Specifically for other transports as decided by TC. + </li> + </ol> + </li> + <li> + Specification of device-specific configuration. + <ol class="vanilla-lower-alpha"> + <li> + For network devices. + </li> + <li> + For block storage devices. + </li> + <li> + For entropy devices. + </li> + <li> + For console devices. + </li> + <li> + For memory ballooning devices. + </li> + <li> + For SCSI endpoint devices. + </li> + <li> + Non-normative advice for designing new device types. + </li> + <li> + List of reserved device numbers for non-specified device types. (This section is likely to see ongoing maintenance before 2.0). + </li> + <li> + List of reserved feature numbers for non-specified features for each device type. (This section is likely to see ongoing maintenance before 2.0). + </li> + </ol> + </li> + <li> + Non-normative code examples for operation of guest/host side of buffers. + </li> + <li> + Non-normative guide for creating devices which also support previous mode(s). + </li> + </ol> + <p> + We anticipate deliverables (1) and (2) to be a single work, and (3) and (4) to be separate works. The projected delivery dates are 12 to 16 months after the first meeting. + </p> + </li> + <li> + IPR Mode + <p> + Non-Assertion Mode + </p> + </li> + <li> + Audience + <p> + Developers of hypervisors and device driver authors. + </p> + </li> + <li> + Language + <p> + US English. + </p> + </li> + </ol> +</body> +</html> -- MST


  • 3.  [PATCH 02/17] charter: update historical notes

    Posted 02-03-2021 22:46
    In the background section, be more specific that it refers to state at the time it was written (2013). Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> --- charter.html 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/charter.html b/charter.html index 7006009..1e1ffd3 100644 --- a/charter.html +++ b/charter.html @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ These guests need networks, storage, consoles and similar but non-virtualization-aware standard devices cannot be shared, or guests may not be permitted to access host devices at all. The simplest solution is to emulate a device expected by the guest operating system, but this can be slow and/or complicated. As most operating systems have facilities for adding drivers for new physical hardware, we can use the same facilities to add drivers for devices which are easier and/or more efficient to implement in software. </p> <p> - As every hypervisor is different, they tend to implement hypervisor-specific devices, requiring every guest to support a new device for that environment. For example, Linux currently supports completely separate drivers for eight different virtualization platforms, with most drivers being sub-optimal. In 2007, an attempt was made to implement a hypervisor and OS-agnostic device model in Linux guests and the KVM hypervisor over the standard PCI bys. This is now also supported by the VirtualBox hypervisor (2010) and FreeBSD guests (2011). + As every hypervisor is different, they tend to implement hypervisor-specific devices, requiring every guest to support a new device for that environment. For example, in 2013 Linux supported completely separate drivers for eight different virtualization platforms, with most drivers being sub-optimal. In 2007, an attempt was made to implement a hypervisor and OS-agnostic device model in Linux guests and the KVM hypervisor over the standard PCI bus. This is now supported by multiple other hypervisors. </p> <p> A Draft Specification -- MST


  • 4.  Re: [virtio] [PATCH 02/17] charter: update historical notes

    Posted 02-04-2021 10:25
    On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 17:45:37 -0500 "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > In the background section, be more specific that it refers to > state at the time it was written (2013). > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> > --- > charter.html 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>


  • 5.  [PATCH 03/17] charter: 1.0 is history

    Posted 02-03-2021 22:46
    make everything there past tense Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> --- charter.html 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/charter.html b/charter.html index 1e1ffd3..cec72d9 100644 --- a/charter.html +++ b/charter.html @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ A 1.0 Specification </p> <p> - Our goal is to keep the good, discard the bad, and make the ugly optional. In particular, we will try not to break too much, and ensure it's possible for devices to support both 1.0 compliant and legacy guest drivers. + With the 1.0 Specification, the goal of the OASIS Virtual I/O Device (VIRTIO) Technical Committee was to keep the good, discard the bad, and make the ugly optional. In particular, the Committee tried not to break too much, and (with the exception of the mmio transport) the specification is designed to make it possible for devices to support both 1.0 compliant and legacy guest drivers. </p> </li> <li> -- MST


  • 6.  Re: [virtio] [PATCH 03/17] charter: 1.0 is history

    Posted 02-04-2021 10:27
    On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 17:45:40 -0500 "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > make everything there past tense > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> > --- > charter.html 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>


  • 7.  [PATCH 04/17] charter: mention 1.x series in the background section

    Posted 02-03-2021 22:46
    Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> --- charter.html 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) diff --git a/charter.html b/charter.html index cec72d9..a8b2356 100644 --- a/charter.html +++ b/charter.html @@ -37,6 +37,12 @@ <p> With the 1.0 Specification, the goal of the OASIS Virtual I/O Device (VIRTIO) Technical Committee was to keep the good, discard the bad, and make the ugly optional. In particular, the Committee tried not to break too much, and (with the exception of the mmio transport) the specification is designed to make it possible for devices to support both 1.0 compliant and legacy guest drivers. </p> + <p> + 1.X Specifications + </p> + <p> + With the 1.1, 1.2 and future revisions of the Specification, we aim to evolve this standard further, while both continuing to honor the goals of the 1.0 Specification and to include new objectives. + </p> </li> <li> Scope -- MST


  • 8.  Re: [virtio] [PATCH 04/17] charter: mention 1.x series in the background section

    Posted 02-04-2021 10:31
    On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 17:45:42 -0500 "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> > --- > charter.html 6 ++++++ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/charter.html b/charter.html > index cec72d9..a8b2356 100644 > --- a/charter.html > +++ b/charter.html > @@ -37,6 +37,12 @@ > <p> > With the 1.0 Specification, the goal of the OASIS Virtual I/O Device (VIRTIO) Technical Committee was to keep the good, discard the bad, and make the ugly optional. In particular, the Committee tried not to break too much, and (with the exception of the mmio transport) the specification is designed to make it possible for devices to support both 1.0 compliant and legacy guest drivers. > </p> > + <p> > + 1.X Specifications > + </p> > + <p> > + With the 1.1, 1.2 and future revisions of the Specification, we aim to evolve this standard further, while both continuing to honor the goals of the 1.0 Specification and to include new objectives. > + </p> > </li> > <li> > Scope I'm wondering what our criteria would be to jump from 1.x to 2.x (I think 1.x looks fine for the foreseeable future; for 2.0, I'd expect some really major redesign that would make it impossible to continue to support legacy, or something like that.) Nevertheless, Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>


  • 9.  Re: [virtio] [PATCH 04/17] charter: mention 1.x series in the background section

    Posted 02-04-2021 11:16
    On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 11:30:20AM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 17:45:42 -0500 > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> > > --- > > charter.html 6 ++++++ > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/charter.html b/charter.html > > index cec72d9..a8b2356 100644 > > --- a/charter.html > > +++ b/charter.html > > @@ -37,6 +37,12 @@ > > <p> > > With the 1.0 Specification, the goal of the OASIS Virtual I/O Device (VIRTIO) Technical Committee was to keep the good, discard the bad, and make the ugly optional. In particular, the Committee tried not to break too much, and (with the exception of the mmio transport) the specification is designed to make it possible for devices to support both 1.0 compliant and legacy guest drivers. > > </p> > > + <p> > > + 1.X Specifications > > + </p> > > + <p> > > + With the 1.1, 1.2 and future revisions of the Specification, we aim to evolve this standard further, while both continuing to honor the goals of the 1.0 Specification and to include new objectives. > > + </p> > > </li> > > <li> > > Scope > > I'm wondering what our criteria would be to jump from 1.x to 2.x (I > think 1.x looks fine for the foreseeable future; for 2.0, I'd expect > some really major redesign that would make it impossible to continue to > support legacy, or something like that.) Or we will do like many projects have been doing recently and just jump to 2.0 at a random time ;) > Nevertheless, > > Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>


  • 10.  [PATCH 05/17] charter: add channel I/O to list

    Posted 02-03-2021 22:46
    Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> --- charter.html 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) diff --git a/charter.html b/charter.html index a8b2356..38cad98 100644 --- a/charter.html +++ b/charter.html @@ -68,6 +68,9 @@ <li> Specifically for virtio over mmio. </li> + <li> + Specifically for virtio over channel I/O. + </li> <li> Specifically for other transports as decided by TC. </li> -- MST


  • 11.  Re: [virtio] [PATCH 05/17] charter: add channel I/O to list

    Posted 02-04-2021 10:31
    On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 17:45:44 -0500 "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> > --- > charter.html 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>


  • 12.  [PATCH 06/17] charter: drop attempts to list all devices

    Posted 02-03-2021 22:46
    we are adding new device types all the time. no point in trying to list them all in the charter. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> --- charter.html 17 +---------------- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 16 deletions(-) diff --git a/charter.html b/charter.html index 38cad98..82fb981 100644 --- a/charter.html +++ b/charter.html @@ -80,22 +80,7 @@ Specification of device-specific configuration. <ol class="vanilla-lower-alpha"> <li> - For network devices. - </li> - <li> - For block storage devices. - </li> - <li> - For entropy devices. - </li> - <li> - For console devices. - </li> - <li> - For memory ballooning devices. - </li> - <li> - For SCSI endpoint devices. + Normative requirements for specified device types. </li> <li> Non-normative advice for designing new device types. -- MST


  • 13.  Re: [virtio] [PATCH 06/17] charter: drop attempts to list all devices

    Posted 02-04-2021 10:34
    On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 17:45:46 -0500 "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > we are adding new device types all the time. > no point in trying to list them all in the charter. > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> > --- > charter.html 17 +---------------- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 16 deletions(-) Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>


  • 14.  [PATCH 07/17] charter: reserved id/feature list has nothing to do with 2.0

    Posted 02-03-2021 22:46
    Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> --- charter.html 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/charter.html b/charter.html index 82fb981..7f1583e 100644 --- a/charter.html +++ b/charter.html @@ -86,10 +86,10 @@ Non-normative advice for designing new device types. </li> <li> - List of reserved device numbers for non-specified device types. (This section is likely to see ongoing maintenance before 2.0). + List of reserved device numbers for non-specified device types. (This section is likely to see ongoing maintenance). </li> <li> - List of reserved feature numbers for non-specified features for each device type. (This section is likely to see ongoing maintenance before 2.0). + List of reserved feature numbers for non-specified features for each device type. (This section is likely to see ongoing maintenance). </li> </ol> </li> -- MST


  • 15.  Re: [virtio] [PATCH 07/17] charter: reserved id/feature list has nothing to do with 2.0

    Posted 02-04-2021 11:13
    On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 17:45:48 -0500 "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> > --- > charter.html 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>


  • 16.  [PATCH 08/17] charter: explain what legacy is in the background section

    Posted 02-03-2021 22:46
    Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> --- charter.html 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/charter.html b/charter.html index 7f1583e..f3a34f3 100644 --- a/charter.html +++ b/charter.html @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ A 1.0 Specification </p> <p> - With the 1.0 Specification, the goal of the OASIS Virtual I/O Device (VIRTIO) Technical Committee was to keep the good, discard the bad, and make the ugly optional. In particular, the Committee tried not to break too much, and (with the exception of the mmio transport) the specification is designed to make it possible for devices to support both 1.0 compliant and legacy guest drivers. + With the 1.0 Specification, the goal of the OASIS Virtual I/O Device (VIRTIO) Technical Committee was to keep the good, discard the bad, and make the ugly optional. The "Virtio PCI Card Specification" 0.9.5, was used as a starting point (referred to as "legacy"). In particular, the Committee tried not to break too much, and (with the exception of the mmio transport) the specification is designed to make it possible for devices to support both 1.0 compliant and legacy guest drivers. </p> <p> 1.X Specifications -- MST


  • 17.  Re: [virtio] [PATCH 08/17] charter: explain what legacy is in the background section

    Posted 02-04-2021 11:14
    On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 17:45:50 -0500 "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> > --- > charter.html 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>


  • 18.  [PATCH 09/17] charter: update on deliverables

    Posted 02-03-2021 22:46
    we don't have multiple documents. we expect to deliver specifications periodically. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> --- charter.html 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/charter.html b/charter.html index f3a34f3..11c6f70 100644 --- a/charter.html +++ b/charter.html @@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ </li> </ol> <p> - We anticipate deliverables (1) and (2) to be a single work, and (3) and (4) to be separate works. The projected delivery dates are 12 to 16 months after the first meeting. + The projected delivery dates for the specifications are each 12 to 16 months. </p> </li> <li> -- MST


  • 19.  Re: [virtio] [PATCH 09/17] charter: update on deliverables

    Posted 02-04-2021 11:16
    On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 17:45:53 -0500 "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > we don't have multiple documents. > we expect to deliver specifications periodically. > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> > --- > charter.html 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/charter.html b/charter.html > index f3a34f3..11c6f70 100644 > --- a/charter.html > +++ b/charter.html > @@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ > </li> > </ol> > <p> > - We anticipate deliverables (1) and (2) to be a single work, and (3) and (4) to be separate works. The projected delivery dates are 12 to 16 months after the first meeting. > + The projected delivery dates for the specifications are each 12 to 16 months. Maybe "The projected delivery dates for the specifications are a deliverable every 12 to 16 months." ? > </p> > </li> > <li>


  • 20.  Re: [virtio] [PATCH 09/17] charter: update on deliverables

    Posted 02-05-2021 14:39
    On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 12:16:10PM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 17:45:53 -0500 > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > > > we don't have multiple documents. > > we expect to deliver specifications periodically. > > > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> > > --- > > charter.html 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/charter.html b/charter.html > > index f3a34f3..11c6f70 100644 > > --- a/charter.html > > +++ b/charter.html > > @@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ > > </li> > > </ol> > > <p> > > - We anticipate deliverables (1) and (2) to be a single work, and (3) and (4) to be separate works. The projected delivery dates are 12 to 16 months after the first meeting. > > + The projected delivery dates for the specifications are each 12 to 16 months. > > Maybe > > "The projected delivery dates for the specifications are a deliverable > every 12 to 16 months." > > ? Don't really like the repeated "delivery/deliverable". Do you prefer every to each then? > > </p> > > </li> > > <li>


  • 21.  Re: [virtio] [PATCH 09/17] charter: update on deliverables

    Posted 02-05-2021 15:35
    On Fri, 5 Feb 2021 09:39:10 -0500 "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 12:16:10PM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 17:45:53 -0500 > > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > we don't have multiple documents. > > > we expect to deliver specifications periodically. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> > > > --- > > > charter.html 2 +- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/charter.html b/charter.html > > > index f3a34f3..11c6f70 100644 > > > --- a/charter.html > > > +++ b/charter.html > > > @@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ > > > </li> > > > </ol> > > > <p> > > > - We anticipate deliverables (1) and (2) to be a single work, and (3) and (4) to be separate works. The projected delivery dates are 12 to 16 months after the first meeting. > > > + The projected delivery dates for the specifications are each 12 to 16 months. > > > > Maybe > > > > "The projected delivery dates for the specifications are a deliverable > > every 12 to 16 months." > > > > ? > > Don't really like the repeated "delivery/deliverable". Do you prefer > every to each then? I slightly prefer "every"; but would like feedback from a native speaker on that. > > > > > > </p> > > > </li> > > > <li> >


  • 22.  Re: [virtio] [PATCH 09/17] charter: update on deliverables

    Posted 02-08-2021 12:12
    On Fri, Feb 05, 2021 at 04:34:39PM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Fri, 5 Feb 2021 09:39:10 -0500 > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 12:16:10PM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > > On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 17:45:53 -0500 > > > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > > we don't have multiple documents. > > > > we expect to deliver specifications periodically. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> > > > > --- > > > > charter.html 2 +- > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/charter.html b/charter.html > > > > index f3a34f3..11c6f70 100644 > > > > --- a/charter.html > > > > +++ b/charter.html > > > > @@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ > > > > </li> > > > > </ol> > > > > <p> > > > > - We anticipate deliverables (1) and (2) to be a single work, and (3) and (4) to be separate works. The projected delivery dates are 12 to 16 months after the first meeting. > > > > + The projected delivery dates for the specifications are each 12 to 16 months. > > > > > > Maybe > > > > > > "The projected delivery dates for the specifications are a deliverable > > > every 12 to 16 months." > > > > > > ? > > > > Don't really like the repeated "delivery/deliverable". Do you prefer > > every to each then? > > I slightly prefer "every"; but would like feedback from a native > speaker on that. OK I made the change. > > > > > > > > > > </p> > > > > </li> > > > > <li> > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that > generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php


  • 23.  [PATCH 10/17] charter: add motivation for changes made since 1.0

    Posted 02-03-2021 22:46
    Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> --- charter.html 7 ++++++- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/charter.html b/charter.html index 11c6f70..8153de2 100644 --- a/charter.html +++ b/charter.html @@ -41,7 +41,12 @@ 1.X Specifications </p> <p> - With the 1.1, 1.2 and future revisions of the Specification, we aim to evolve this standard further, while both continuing to honor the goals of the 1.0 Specification and to include new objectives. + Support for new technologies often calls for extensions to the standard. For example, + as technologies such as nested virtualization and hardware-based + implementations of VIRTIO devices became popular, these devices are no longer + necessarily part of a hypervisor. This in turn requires a strong commitment to + driver and device compatibility, as well as to driver and device security. + With the 1.1, 1.2 and future revisions of the Specification, we aim to evolve the VIRTIO standard further, addressing such new requirements while both continuing to honor the goals of the 1.0 Specification and including new objectives. </p> </li> <li> -- MST


  • 24.  Re: [virtio] [PATCH 10/17] charter: add motivation for changes made since 1.0

    Posted 02-04-2021 11:18
    On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 17:45:55 -0500 "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> > --- > charter.html 7 ++++++- > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>


  • 25.  [PATCH 11/17] charter: update to mention 1.X instead of 0.9, 2.0

    Posted 02-03-2021 22:46
    0.9 is no longer relevant. As for 2.0, let's stick to documenting what we know we plan to do, and not speculate on what we might do in indefinitely future. Also, drop some idiomatic humor - while fun, its meaning is not immediately obvious for non-native english speakers. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> --- charter.html 6 ++++-- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/charter.html b/charter.html index 8153de2..a1d67ff 100644 --- a/charter.html +++ b/charter.html @@ -52,11 +52,13 @@ <li> Scope <p> - The "Virtio PCI Card Specification" 0.9.5, minus the Appendix H, shall be used as a starting point (referred to as "legacy"). Note that we expect the final output of this TC to be incompatible with that specification, though it will be possible for virtual devices to support both legacy and modern guest drivers. + The TC will develop and produce versions 1.X of the OASIS Virtual I/O Device (VIRTIO) OASIS Standard by refining and documenting existing implementations and practice. </p> <p> - The TC will produce an OASIS Standard by refining and documenting existing implementations and practice. After publication of the initial OASIS Standard, the TC may choose to develop a Version 2.0 standard that builds on lessons learned and identified trends and that may result in a significantly different architecture and approach. Until then, the TC shall not throw out the baby with the bathwater, boil the ocean, or embark on a PhD research topic. </p> + <p> + Starting from version 1.1, each version of the specification shall be used as a starting point for the development of the next version of the specification. + </p> <p> The TC will consider one or more buses for virtual devices, including PCI. It will consider various kinds of devices, including network devices. Each part of the OASIS Standard will be considered in terms of portability, simplicity, least-surprise for driver authors, extensibility and performance. In particular, the effect of future radical extensions (such as layout changes) will be considered. </p> -- MST


  • 26.  Re: [virtio] [PATCH 11/17] charter: update to mention 1.X instead of 0.9, 2.0

    Posted 02-04-2021 11:21
    On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 17:45:57 -0500 "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > 0.9 is no longer relevant. As for 2.0, let's stick to documenting what > we know we plan to do, and not speculate on what we might do in > indefinitely future. > > Also, drop some idiomatic humor - while fun, its meaning is not > immediately obvious for non-native english speakers. Although I'll miss the cautioning against PhD research topics :) > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> > --- > charter.html 6 ++++-- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>


  • 27.  [PATCH 12/17] charter: document our focus on compatibility

    Posted 02-03-2021 22:46
    This has been a FAQ for a long time. Let's address this. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> --- charter.html 14 ++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+) diff --git a/charter.html b/charter.html index a1d67ff..006b591 100644 --- a/charter.html +++ b/charter.html @@ -59,6 +59,20 @@ <p> Starting from version 1.1, each version of the specification shall be used as a starting point for the development of the next version of the specification. </p> + <p> + Note that we expect the output of this TC to be compatible with all previous versions of the specification, such that + a compliant devices and drivers remain compliant with future versions of the specification. + In particular, special care will be taken such that drivers compliant with a certain version of the specification can also support devices compliant with all past versions of the specification, and vice versa. + </p> + <p> + When correcting defects in the specification, e.g. by adding new normative statements, the TC will + also take special care to avoid declaring existing working implementations non-compliant + as far as possible. + The TC will take into account factors such as existance and prevalence of implementations with the + defective behaviour and whether these implementations are working and robust. + When in doubt, the TC will err on the conservative side, such as by adding new feature bits + or by making the corrected behaviour recommended but not mandatory. + </p> <p> The TC will consider one or more buses for virtual devices, including PCI. It will consider various kinds of devices, including network devices. Each part of the OASIS Standard will be considered in terms of portability, simplicity, least-surprise for driver authors, extensibility and performance. In particular, the effect of future radical extensions (such as layout changes) will be considered. </p> -- MST


  • 28.  Re: [virtio] [PATCH 12/17] charter: document our focus on compatibility

    Posted 02-04-2021 11:23
    On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 17:45:59 -0500 "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > This has been a FAQ for a long time. Let's address this. > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> > --- > charter.html 14 ++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/charter.html b/charter.html > index a1d67ff..006b591 100644 > --- a/charter.html > +++ b/charter.html > @@ -59,6 +59,20 @@ > <p> > Starting from version 1.1, each version of the specification shall be used as a starting point for the development of the next version of the specification. > </p> > + <p> > + Note that we expect the output of this TC to be compatible with all previous versions of the specification, such that > + a compliant devices and drivers remain compliant with future versions of the specification. s/a // > + In particular, special care will be taken such that drivers compliant with a certain version of the specification can also support devices compliant with all past versions of the specification, and vice versa. > + </p> > + <p> > + When correcting defects in the specification, e.g. by adding new normative statements, the TC will > + also take special care to avoid declaring existing working implementations non-compliant > + as far as possible. > + The TC will take into account factors such as existance and prevalence of implementations with the > + defective behaviour and whether these implementations are working and robust. > + When in doubt, the TC will err on the conservative side, such as by adding new feature bits > + or by making the corrected behaviour recommended but not mandatory. > + </p> > <p> > The TC will consider one or more buses for virtual devices, including PCI. It will consider various kinds of devices, including network devices. Each part of the OASIS Standard will be considered in terms of portability, simplicity, least-surprise for driver authors, extensibility and performance. In particular, the effect of future radical extensions (such as layout changes) will be considered. > </p> Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>


  • 29.  [PATCH 14/17] chater: document what we care about in changes

    Posted 02-03-2021 22:46
    add compatibility, securiry. layout changes need not be a drasctic change if done carefully. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> --- charter.html 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/charter.html b/charter.html index a41f6eb..2a460bd 100644 --- a/charter.html +++ b/charter.html @@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ or by making the corrected behaviour recommended but not mandatory. </p> <p> - The TC will consider one or more buses for virtual devices, including PCI. It will consider various kinds of devices, including network devices. Each part of the OASIS Standard will be considered in terms of portability, simplicity, least-surprise for driver authors, extensibility and performance. In particular, the effect of future radical extensions (such as layout changes) will be considered. + The TC will consider one or more buses for virtual devices, including PCI. It will consider various kinds of devices, including network devices. Each part of the OASIS Standard will be considered in terms of portability, simplicity, least-surprise for driver authors, security, compatibility, extensibility and performance. In particular, the effect of future extensions (such as layout changes) will be considered. </p> </li> <li> -- MST


  • 30.  Re: [virtio] [PATCH 14/17] chater: document what we care about in changes

    Posted 02-04-2021 11:25
    On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 17:46:04 -0500 "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > add compatibility, securiry. layout changes need not be a drasctic > change if done carefully. > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> > --- > charter.html 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>


  • 31.  [PATCH 13/17] charter: TC as registrar for device IDs/features

    Posted 02-03-2021 22:46
    Already the case, let's document this is in scope. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> --- charter.html 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/charter.html b/charter.html index 006b591..a41f6eb 100644 --- a/charter.html +++ b/charter.html @@ -55,6 +55,7 @@ The TC will develop and produce versions 1.X of the OASIS Virtual I/O Device (VIRTIO) OASIS Standard by refining and documenting existing implementations and practice. </p> <p> + The TC will also act as a registrar for the list of reserved device numbers for non-specified device types, as well as the list of reserved feature numbers for non-specified features for each device type. </p> <p> Starting from version 1.1, each version of the specification shall be used as a starting point for the development of the next version of the specification. -- MST


  • 32.  Re: [virtio] [PATCH 13/17] charter: TC as registrar for device IDs/features

    Posted 02-04-2021 11:23
    On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 17:46:01 -0500 "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > Already the case, let's document this is in scope. > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> > --- > charter.html 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>


  • 33.  [PATCH 15/17] charter: terminology

    Posted 02-03-2021 22:46
    Use terminology consistent with spec. Say driver/device and not guest/host. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> --- charter.html 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/charter.html b/charter.html index 2a460bd..f0c19c7 100644 --- a/charter.html +++ b/charter.html @@ -116,7 +116,7 @@ </ol> </li> <li> - Non-normative code examples for operation of guest/host side of buffers. + Non-normative code examples for operation of driver/device side of buffers. </li> <li> Non-normative guide for creating devices which also support previous mode(s). -- MST


  • 34.  Re: [virtio] [PATCH 15/17] charter: terminology

    Posted 02-04-2021 11:26
    On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 17:46:06 -0500 "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > Use terminology consistent with spec. Say driver/device and not guest/host. > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> > --- > charter.html 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>


  • 35.  [PATCH 17/17] charter: terminology

    Posted 02-03-2021 22:46
    It's ok to mention hypervisors but list device authors as audience as well. Devices are no longer always part of the hypervisor. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> --- charter.html 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/charter.html b/charter.html index d2d317c..833cd5d 100644 --- a/charter.html +++ b/charter.html @@ -135,7 +135,7 @@ <li> Audience <p> - Developers of hypervisors and device driver authors. + Developers of devices, hypervisors and device driver authors. </p> </li> <li> -- MST


  • 36.  Re: [virtio] [PATCH 17/17] charter: terminology

    Posted 02-04-2021 11:29
    On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 17:46:10 -0500 "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > It's ok to mention hypervisors but list device authors as audience as > well. Devices are no longer always part of the hypervisor. > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> > --- > charter.html 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/charter.html b/charter.html > index d2d317c..833cd5d 100644 > --- a/charter.html > +++ b/charter.html > @@ -135,7 +135,7 @@ > <li> > Audience > <p> > - Developers of hypervisors and device driver authors. > + Developers of devices, hypervisors and device driver authors. Maybe "Developers of devices, hypervisors, and device drivers." ? > </p> > </li> > <li>


  • 37.  Re: [virtio] [PATCH 17/17] charter: terminology

    Posted 02-05-2021 14:18
    On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 12:28:46PM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 17:46:10 -0500 > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > > > It's ok to mention hypervisors but list device authors as audience as > > well. Devices are no longer always part of the hypervisor. > > > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> > > --- > > charter.html 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/charter.html b/charter.html > > index d2d317c..833cd5d 100644 > > --- a/charter.html > > +++ b/charter.html > > @@ -135,7 +135,7 @@ > > <li> > > Audience > > <p> > > - Developers of hypervisors and device driver authors. > > + Developers of devices, hypervisors and device driver authors. > > > Maybe > > "Developers of devices, hypervisors, and device drivers." > > ? Okay. > > </p> > > </li> > > <li>


  • 38.  [PATCH 16/17] charter: terminology

    Posted 02-03-2021 22:46
    Consistent with spec, say legacy and not previous mode. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> --- charter.html 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/charter.html b/charter.html index f0c19c7..d2d317c 100644 --- a/charter.html +++ b/charter.html @@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ Non-normative code examples for operation of driver/device side of buffers. </li> <li> - Non-normative guide for creating devices which also support previous mode(s). + Non-normative guide for creating devices and drivers which also support a legacy mode(s). </li> </ol> <p> -- MST


  • 39.  Re: [virtio] [PATCH 16/17] charter: terminology

    Posted 02-04-2021 11:27
    On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 17:46:08 -0500 "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > Consistent with spec, say legacy and not previous mode. > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> > --- > charter.html 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/charter.html b/charter.html > index f0c19c7..d2d317c 100644 > --- a/charter.html > +++ b/charter.html > @@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ > Non-normative code examples for operation of driver/device side of buffers. > </li> > <li> > - Non-normative guide for creating devices which also support previous mode(s). > + Non-normative guide for creating devices and drivers which also support a legacy mode(s). Isn't it just "legacy mode"? I don't think we have more than one. > </li> > </ol> > <p>